I would treat those as a wishlist instead. How many would be really not listed as tentative already and actually get a second vote. More than ten? I mean, why reduce the automatic version to manual for it. This is of course assuming there is still a plan for an automatic approach.
You obviously have all the "aspiring" sites from our forum. Off the top of my head a few highlights:
* Salar de Uyuni including Incahuasi. Potentially crossing into Chile for Atacarma part of the desert.
* Vale Sagrado (or each of its components).
* Kanazawa Garden
* Trans Sib
* Plenty more of American NPs
* Lakes of Sweden
* West Coast of Ireland / Ring of Kerry / Aran Islands
* Castles of Scotland / Highlands
* Tonle Lake in Cambodia
I think others will come up with more. Being able to circumvent the "official" list I think needs to be part of the exercise.
Perhaps the way round now is to divide it into 2 exercises?? i.e
I would favor a different approach: Create a new kind of site (Aspiring). In the database these would be normal tentative sites, but we would show them separately. If at all. This way we could keep the same approach for all and have a true, live missing list.
Els would be the judge when to create an entry for an aspiring site. I would also say whoever proposes one needs to write a description and a rationale, justifying the "aspiring" part.